into the north pole and in just a few days will blast off for the international space station that will be cool the torch is passing through towns and cities of the world's biggest country currently touring russia's north don't forget our two dot com there's a full selection of videos and photos from the olympic flame smell. technology innovation all the list of elements from around russia we've. covered. shifting sayings and alliances advances and reversals outside military intervention to instill me these are among some of the descriptions that apply to

the middle east since the start of the arab spring what are we experiencing in this trivial region the end of the what's new cool view or merely instability in violence with no end in sight. what you're dealing with here is that you did a few years tell you where there are children who will just be doing callbacks on the and today but electronic media that that's the future if you don't have a secret part of it to do the. eat your we're going to face big problems. hello and welcome to worlds apart one thing in common between foreign managers and fashionistas is that preoccupation with chance then i'm just we're all about the

tax grab the two thousand staff and today having for marching markets especially the bric countries who collectively attempt to challenge the economic supremacy of the developed world our guest today believes that the world fascination with breaks will be short leave them in fact is almost over but it doesn't necessarily mean the end of their rise of the rest well to discuss that i'm now joined by richard sharma who leads the emerging market team at morgan stanley mr sharma thank you very much for your time now if you break out nations took the world by storm it became a bestseller almost overnight but i think one of the reasons why it was such a success is because people tend to react to it in a very emotional and almost political way some people in the brics countries to get as your prediction of the almost immediate demise and some people in the west who could as a. promise of that almost immediate recovery but i guess you didn't mean either of that right i think my point was to sort of speak about the world as i see it and i

spoke about some of these brics countries and on an individual basis and as i was traveling to various places from brazil to india i was getting a sense that a sense of complacency is setting in after agreed last decade and that it was bound to lead to a slowdown in reforms and so therefore the good traits of these economies will bound to slow down in order to live up to the hyped up expectations so it really is . a very honest assessment of what i told would be the goods to these videos countries but i think this is where your book gats rather ambiguous and this ambiguity was even better articulated in your later article in the foreign policy magazine that you there have provoked actively titled broken brakes why the rest of prizing and i think it contains two major fallacies first. the brakes are not broken i mean their growth is slowing down but they're still growing they're still

developing and second is that the rest didn't stop rising simply because the rest is not confined to the brics countries and what is more important is that that's major transformation of global economic and political architecture away from western dominance and towards a more level playing field is still happening and if it had i think it is actually accelerating yes but if you look i was to be issue with what happened last decade and lost a kid it seemed every single emerging market was going to rise to a very rapid peace because between two thousand and three and two thousand and eight that golden era every single developing country was recording a very high growth treat almost without exception and i was taking issue with that that that is unlikely to happen the long term history of economic development. is that some countries do with some countries do nor do with so now look at what's happening the last couple of years the rate of growth of brazil russia south africa

these countries are slowed down dramatically and the forecasts i mean is that the groups rate of these countries in particular very norbi fostered in the united states and that is a major disappointment because these countries have a per capita income or a will to live which is much lower than that of the united states the fact that these major they've gone and knees in the developing world that unlikely to grow any foster than the leading economy in the world that's the united states is i think a major disappointment but and specially compared to what happened last decade so i was making the argument that what happened last decade is an exception and the not every single emerging market is going to boom and it's going to happen in a really selective manner yet but the fact that then no one rising or no developing at such a high speed as before doesn't mean that this major transformation. is not happening and the reason why i'm saying that is because obviously it's not just about how

much money investors can make all of those countries i think most of those countries and all concerned with that but what they are actually interested in is changing the existing economic practices and it's not a secret that for the last couple of decades developed countries have had greater leverage of sort of shaping global trading practices in their favor and part of that own konami growth was conditioned on having those rules in favor of but as you have more countries stepping into the fold you will also have more power sharing and also mentally some of those perks a canonic perks that the united states and some of the developed economies used to take for granted and some of the parts that enable of the well being they will be taken away from them even though i don't agree with this assessment of. vibing the world into two distinct blocks which is developed and emerging i think that yes the

difference between developed countries and emerging countries is obviously per capita income to the per capita income of the developing countries is much lower than in the developed countries but to say that all the developed countries acted gone certain all the emerging markets act in concert i think that is not the right assessment because there are lots of differences in the developed world between us and europe there are lots of differences similarly in the emerging world there are lots of differences for example. russia brazil south africa they all benefit enormously from rising commodity prices countries like india. they all want lower commodity prices so you know there are many differences and i think that the alliances also before they india feels much closer to the united states that it feeds to china russia you know fees obviously closer to china now than it used to feel to the united states but its relations with europe are mixed so i think that these very distinct. of all these countries and seeing that the developed world is

acting in concert to make the rules which suit them at the cost of the emerging world i don't agree with this guy because i feel that within the emerging world there are lots of differences and developing countries have their own priorities which mean north meet the priorities of other developing countries that's a very good point against lumping the. countries together and approaching down an individual basis but i think this habit of looking into the world as us versus them or as winners and losers is a very american thing it's a winner takes it all sort of approach and the problem with it is of course that not many countries see the world this way and it is in the united states in particular that the rise of the rast is perceived as a threat as you know chinese and indians and russians and brazilians and the rest of the well taking died. taking that taxes they can die a petunia tea opportunities for growth and so on so ultimately you know you are

arguing against that but on some level but also on some other level you are sort of unable ing that thinking as well because you are very positive on the united states and you also say that the existing infrastructure that again in my view favor of the developed world for quite some time is not going to change yet you know but what i sort of i would really issue with as you point out is lumping countries together and therefore i thought this brick makes no sense because i couldn't give in to being a decade ago again it was the creation. you heard in the united states it got popular as well that he would just putting together for countries that had very little in common these four countries are the large developing economies and this i couldn't became very popular because last decade every single emerging market boom so putting any acronym together walked and i think that now what's happening is

that you're finding out that these bric countries have lots of differences amongst them and so talking about them as a single entity is just very misleading so i think that if you speak about these countries individually and i'm not trying to say that the united states is superior to all emerging markets my point is that within the developed world that a difference is that the united states is doing better than many european countries and within the emerging world there are differences so i think there are all these new stars which are emerging out there and we need to also speak recognition of them rather than just keep speaking about bricks now you make a point about not using breaks as an acronym and it can all make sense but brics is now also political leaders getting together for regular summits and discussing not just economic policies that those summits but also that political stances. sometimes coordinating those political stances do you think that this political card to nation has any economic value of actually changing the on deadline day

nomics the underlying structural transferred in the global economy i don't think so because look at the evidence so far i mean you pointed to the brics summits you know these summits have been going on now for the last five to six years there was one in march this year and word came out of it not saying they wanted to create a development bank and yet there the differences are so huge for example all the other countries from india brazil russia. china and sort of influence would be would be very large and these other countries would feel marginalized so the problem is that there's not much which can come out of this because china's economic size and political clout is so much bigger go to the other but for example they want to join through here when they join their political clout together and we have seen there plenty of examples of that in the case of russia and china and the u.n. security council they can not only counter the united states politically they can

also influence that interest economically and this is exactly what i mean by them coming together not necessarily coming up with some concrete can all make proposals development banks and what have you but ultimately you know staying together coordinating that policy stances getting to know each other maybe on a personal level and then to using those personal connections and you know the potential for that economic and political convergence one of the moment there are no i think that's a fair point that which is that if you have two countries which see that interests aligned and they're able to pull together like you mentioned about russia and china and sort of do something at the u.n. that's fair my point is that why should it be just these four to five countries what's so special about them for example in light in the. trudi. the mexican economy is doing much better compared to the brazilian economy and similarly like

each year there's the example of south korea is a fairly large economy you have the likes of indonesia which are now going to become a trillion dollar economy this also has already become a fairly large economy so the main issue right because the book is the fact that i'm just talking about brics is a very limited view of the emerging would ok but for example one thing in common that the break countries have is there are sort of very keen of that in this all of the social unrest and the need to preserve social stability and we've seen that in china we've seen that and russia we've seen that in brazil i think and to some extent we've seen that in india and all those countries use different methods somebody some of them use democratic math and some of them use more authoritarian the math and some of them put more money into social programs trying to placate their populations but given the fact that social and rust is really spreading around the world and in many other places it is really threatening not

only economic growth but you know simply cannot make stability in the security of a vast amounts do you think that could be perceived as competitive advantage you know that insistence on preserving the social order and they're resisting resistance to any sort of regime change or revolution on that own territory you know what i think the same sort of fact is today i did work in the key there of course at a different level those factors that it work in egypt so i don't think that you know that is a competitive advantage of just the brics countries and the way they're dealing with all this is also very different i mean again china there's been so far no one received or we have seen protests in the other countries that you mention like in brazil for example those protests are being dealt with and seen as a wake up call for the government to do something off to the fact that investment didn't go. and the quality of public services has been so poor in recent years in bill key the way they lead it is dealing with that is very different in

a much more sort of strong handed a targeted in manner so the responses are very different and i don't think that preserving social stability can be a common theme for all these countries because the way they deal with this their responses to all this is very different and this is a very interesting thought we will come back to this conversation right after the break. speak your language. programs in documentaries in arabic it's

cool here. reporting from the world of your p.c. interview true story for you. the arabic to find out more visit or a big. dog called. welcome back to worlds apart where we are discussing economic breakdowns and breakthroughs fifth reacher sharma be had of the emerging market team at morgan stanley mr sharma before we went to the break we were discussing social protest social unrest spreading around a while then i wonder given the preponderance of those moods around the world free of sin mass protests in brazil recent played the arab countries can't get enough of it since some countries in europe and term care are also quite volatile so many of these protests are driven by economic grievances i guess with the only exception of

turkey i wonder if the global consensus on the risks posed by social instability has changed in recent years in any way because arguably we have never had so many protests around the world on such a large scale and again the security of the zero investment would depend on the stability of the governing system right yes that's true but i also feel that because the last decade was so placid when. there was so few protests and so many emerging markets were doing so well and booming that before guard the fact that in the 1980's in one nine hundred ninety s. there were lots of across many developing countries including eastern europe even in places such as brazil. and north korea sticking place in many countries it wasn't so volatile and the outcome wasn't so bloody because you cannot compare what happened in poland for example to what is happening in egypt right now because it was china you know like china had its massive protests back in one thousand nine hundred nine so i agree that yes you know there's been

a sort of sudden spike in the number of protests in the last few months and quarters but i think we forget that in one thousand a.d. the one nine hundred ninety s. they also were a lot of protests and last decade was misleadingly very peaceful a lot of emerging markets were booming so we figured that brought this on a normal wheels life in many developing countries and also as we see now in some of the developed countries but i think we have to make a distinction between process speech as he said i normal way of life and volatile and bloody regime change is that is what we also saw in many of the arab countries and when you consider for example what is happening in europe money you have those major strikes and major protests to an economic proposal that is put on the table i would think that is really endangering not only economic growth but the actual taken on a quick it could be but you know for example if you see in places such as brazil is

the decide in fact being seen in a positive way that this is a wake up call so yes sure there was some initial police brutality but it's been handled rather peacefully so in some places it is in fact seen as a wake up call because the good street in these countries have fallen so sharply and the quality of public services have become so bad so yes the arab would like egypt ignore the portishead been quite bloody but in other parts of the world. as a wake up call you can india with will produce in two thousand and eleven it was seen as a wake up i'm not a bad negative about these for this whole being growth as much now i want to ask you a specific question in turkey imagine it before and then your book you're very positive on turkey saying that it is probably the first example of a country proving that you know you can have a successful muslim economy you can have a successful muslim democracy when the leaders really try to separate politics and religion from economy and putting a lot of. saw the lot of africa into. growing domestic market is

enabling that industries and i think that was a very popular argument that is until turkey got embroiled in in syria and the fallout from it has been so far quite significant because they had they lost all their investments in syria and turkey was the single largest investor in syria they created a major source of instability on their southern border with the flow of arms back and forth with the flow of militants they also had to increase their social spending significantly because of the presence of the refugees they had to increase their military spending significantly so you have all those major issues stemming from what altimetry was a political and partially religious decision and it is now putting at risk all that hard won six hours that they had over the past few years so do you think your

argument about turkey being that prodigious example of a muslim democracy that was able to separate that it's religion from its economy can be applied to these day that's a fair point when he spoke about in the book was how he had done from being accompanied by a big queue to go read hyperinflation and video. so achieved so much economic success and. i think that was great but the problem there is of course stead o. do on the leader today his attitude has changed which is that after being ready focused on economic reforms and being very sensitive to the concerns of the other parts of the population he now has become much more target did he and less dollar and of any criticism and more paranoid so many leaders stays in power for too long that's a risk that the explicit and as you say that's putting it risks like some of the incredible gains that he has made i still think that they'll be able to come through this but i think what the clear message from the people that is there to do

i need to come up with a succession plan so that new fresh blood can come through and think about how to take the country forward we've been talking about the distinction but then they developed and developing countries speech was introduced back in the fifty's and the sixty's and back at that time the difference big gap in terms of technology in terms of economy in terms of the living standards between those countries was very much pronounced it is no longer the case china may have a lower g.d.p. per capita but technologically it is quiet at the nation do you think this distinction that's been developed and developing countries still. holds any water but yes i think because you know the part capita income levels are still very different so that's that's why we distinguish between developed and developing countries but here is the key point which is that sustaining economic success is a very difficult daas which is that small for me is seen that countries tend to do

well for a while and then they don't policies begin to hurt them and they stumble so i think that's the key point that sustaining economic success is very difficult and so therefore don't bank on the stars of the last decade to continue to be the stars in the subsequent decade i mean the fact of the matter to means is that for the last fifty years the difference in put capital into all the wisdom. it was between the emerging markets and the developed world on change so we've seen cycles and some countries have been able to graduate to becoming developed countries but those are selective but broadly many developing economies find it very difficult to overcome their policies and institutions pheidias and become developed countries now you make references to g.d.p. per capita fairly often in your book and in fact it's one of here mattrick for determining which country is going to be a the next breakout country but i wonder if using absolute figures is really telling the whole story here because obviously the chinese g.d.p.

is much lower than the american but the living standards and expectations of those living standards are also quite different so what would be considered as humiliating living standards in the united states would be. perceived as a pretty good deal in some of these countries so when you try to put it under the same cap in this case an american i don't think you take into account all those additional softer is that can also contribute to how well the country develops how fast it grows and. what kind of yield to delivers to its investors no i didn't do a count mind dinosaur argument is that you can't be in countries with very different per capita income exactly along the lines that you're seeing that is china's per capita income is still a fraction of that of the united states you can't compare the growth rates of the two countries because china needs to grow faster to lift more people out of poverty . can actually do it doesn't mean that china candidate deliver those same deal to

even better yields. than the united states doesn't mean that no i mean i didn't mean that but what i focus on is the vetoes gene are things getting better at the margin in china today or not this is the united states and versus other developing countries i think that's the key metric and the point is the fact of the countries but i think to. getting better at the margin are these new breakout stars and i think that the good streets of many economies such as brazil's south africa is disappointing expectations so i take into account what expectations were different per capita income level when trying to figure out which way the breakout stars are which will not be the breakout stars now and the other economic mantra that is often propagated by western economists especially when they're asked for advice from emerging countries on how to deal with various crisis is that you shouldn't

try to blow you should lot here economies hit the rock bottom and only of them they can and will be able to purge itself of the structural deficiencies yet when you have this recent crisis the united states the united kingdom many other countries in the region want out of the way all of you know bailing out protecting the rag elating and. it not only reeks of double standard it i it actually i would argue damages the chances of global economy of priming itself would you agree with that that's a fair point because i think that if you look at the case of east asia or even russia the way into a massive crisis in ninety seven ninety eight and then but that set the stage for a big boom to begin ofter that because they carried out some significant reforms new leaders came in to police those new leaders new energy levels and so i think

there was a cleansing process that is in the developed world i think that you corrected by sort of cushioning the bill and by going off the stimulus of the stimulus of the stimulus and a more dire using the pain there not being able to carry out the more fundamental reforms needed for growth having said that if you look at the case of the united states the private sector in the us is growing at about three percent but it's really the government sector which is contracting because. they're cutting back on their bloated size which is what's holding gould's down to less than two percent so i agree with your point that the that a better approach has been to carry out reforms and the reforms at the peak at it out only when economies have a hard landing and they have nor their choice but to reform there is any question the blow to sort of nor take the hard decisions and postpone the hard decisions which needs to lord longer term problems well it doesn't look like we have too many points to disagree upon but this is all the time we have for it thank you very much

for being here on worlds apart and please join us again same place same time here and while the part. think you need to review economic ups downs and the find out month stay on the field sang high and the rest of the life to be a few will be everything on. your own.

funds want to. split it up something that is quite simply. was no way over. clearly they were just at the wrong place at the wrong time. and sold to the u.s. or turned over to the u.s. for. the soul that could be buried alive. was saved with great over. and they wanted to turn me into a terrorist so it was they wanted me to admit that i was a member of al qaeda the taliban but i felt with them. not about time i didn't even know what al-qaeda is nevertheless there are people. rave enough to start a fight. something's going to be done that's going to be done by me i have

a short amount of time to do it but it's going to impact me i'd be prosecuted but it's going to impact. on wife my daughter. the one time a trap. on r.g.p. . exactly what happened there i don't know but a woman i killed. piers later is when i got arrested for. for a crime i did not do. we have numerous cases where police officers lie about polygraph results. innocent people to confess to police officers don't beat people anymore i mean it just doesn't happen really. in the course of interrogation why because there's been this is like meant no because the psychological techniques are more effective in obtaining confessions than physical abuse they were often they could get what they wanted they could say what they wanted and there was no evidence of what they did or what they said.

pakistan raises a lot on america's drone campaign which has taken hundreds of innocent lives despite u.s. claims that very few civilians come under fire. when i was outside with my grandmother everything became dark i was scared. a pakistani girl who survived a u.s. drone attack travels to washington to tell congress how her home was destroyed and her grandmother killed. the e.u. isn't satisfied with washington's explanation of n.s.a. surveillance allegations germany wants edward snowden himself to shed some light on reports of its chancellor's phone being town. who she knew brazil germany france india and speak.